Wednesday, December 14, 2005

Cameron: the next Blair ?

"Mr Cameron said that his convincing win in the party's leadership vote had given him a clear mandate for change."Times

And there has been a lot of talk of continuing with 'big government', more 'government interference', more top down agendas, more centralization. 1

In August, Cameron gave a speech saying "Islamist extremists were like Nazis" 2 to the Foreign Policy Center 3, a Blair-created globalist EU thinktank who describe their goals as "developing a vision of a fair and rule-based world order" and promote:

Effective multilateral solutions to global problemsDemocratic and well-governed states as the foundation of order and developmentPartnerships with the private sector to deliver public goodsSupport for progressive policy through effective public diplomacy Inclusivedefinitions of citizenship to underpin internationalist* policies.

* (globalist)

David Cameron is for gay marriage. David Cameron is for the war. Now he's talking about global warming (which amounts to nothing more than extra energy taxes) and all-women candidate lists.

Sorry to say this, but why would you seek to force a load of women into the political ranks, unless you want an extremely unquestioning and easy to manipulate and control backbench support group ? Which is the only reason Blair adopted a lot of women, who most of them, no one would even notice if they were there or not. And by the way I'm not attacking women, I'm attacking forced-in women, or any other allegedly 'under-represented' group. It doesn't work, and that is the idea.

Are we are watching the staged-managed decline of Blair, to be replaced with.....well....another Blair ? And are the public, both Conservative and Labour voters so utterly stupid to think that the only way to deal with the hell we are in is to create a new Blair to kill the first ?

Earlier this week, seriously unfunny person Jo Brand became so worried by Cameron, that she went round pleading for donations to the Labour party, lest the Tories win the next election with an influx of new donors who like the cut of Cameron's jib. It's puke-enducing enough when 'celebrities' get party political, but quite why she is doing this is bizarre, when she admits; she understands that political parties are bankrolled (owned?) by wealthy donors, so Brand is saying donate to Labour because they are 'good' and the Conservatives are 'bad'.

What planet is this woman living on ? Are we to forget it is Blair who hands out peerages to wealthly Labour donors, to fill the Lords with his personal cronies ? Are we to forget it was the Labour party, through it's corruption and spineless cronyism, lies, treachery and deceit that helped deliver you several wars, one of which totally constructed on a cobbled-together pack of lies (the other pre-arranged before 9/11) that has left thousands upon thousands dead and injured ? That has created a Neo-Stalinist political police-state ? That now wants to enslave you in a biometric slave grid ? That promotes torture ? Who's leadership polluted and debased the civil service where it could, or became a conduit for malevolent establishment entity plots, or formed strategic alliances with various establishment puppets and the media to let Blair front a domestic shadow-government by which to force global-government earth-shattering policy through ?

Obviously, there are many good minds who have stood up to this crap within the Labour party, but the ruling elite of New Labour is pure evil, and those within Labour who have directly or indirectly supported that, or turned away from it for an easy ride, can only be considered as some of the lowest forms of life around.

The easily-led like Brand who are stuck in a left/right/good/bad-Mrs Thatcher-still-rules timewarp should realise that the 'danger' of Cameron isn't because 'he is a Tory' as party politics are largely irrelevant, but because he may well be the next Blair, ready to deploy new waves of crap onto a country that is already not really much worth living in at all anymore. OOOOOh, surrrrrre I'm going to donate to the Labour party Jo, lets all turn away from the war, from the premediated murder of thousands of Iraqis based on a pack of lies, and all run around like big simpetons going 'ooooooooooh those Tories, they will close the NHS, they will do this, redistribution goooooooooood, socialist state goooooooooood'.

I'm sorry to tell you Brand there pretty much is no democracy because there is no choice. Whether it was always like that I don't know but it is now.

As for Cameron, he is related to the Queen, his wife is a descendent of Charles II. Cameron has brought back nice guy but possible Bilderberg stooge William Hague. Cameron is for the war, Blair is for the war. We'll see what happens but people should have a lot of concerns about this guy, not because he's a 'Tory' but because there is a real danger he will just pick up where Blair left off.

9 Comments:

I clicked on the article about Jo Brand (never heard of her, I'm in the US) - and thought it was funny how they pointed out that there are a few rich labour supporters, as if that were news. Then they listed four celebrities.

Right now, democracy here and in the US is effectively dead, because it can't function without proper debate. The Cons took the wrong tactical decision to "support the troops" and are now stuck with it. If you listen to some cons. political commentators they sound like Blair stooges, no more, no less.

The "education reforms" (read: more thinly disguised privatisation) are another point in case: Blair's "policies" are essentially centre-right, not progressive.

Cameron is a sign of the "juvenilisation" of the political process and much else in society: if it looks the part it must be the real deal. Wrong. Cameron has little to say and will soon enough start bleating about "tax cuts" and "choice". When will people learn that conservatism is really about maintaining the "have/have not" status quo and even about making the "haves" get even more. In no other European country are conservative forces more hell-bent on serving the financial interests of their cronies than in the Blighted Kingdom. Result? A god-awful public transport system and decades of neglect of the NHS.

Gotham: you haven't missed out put it that way. Well I suppose Brand does her own thing in her own way, she's not what I would call particularly funny though.

And Gert, I totally agree with you about lack of any real debate, and I really hope you are right, and that Cameron is just window-dressing himself, but you know even that is worrying to me, because it just shows that they are so worried that people have been totally conditioned by Blair that only a substitute Blair will do to fool Joe Public.

Indeed, Blair is ideologically glued to his corporatism+police state third way. And many conservatives made the wrong move with the war, and painted themselves with the same blood in doing so.

I wonder if quite a lot of people deep down do care, not everyone obviously, but a lot of people...and understandably, they just switch off from it because it is that bad now. A lot of others think that to go along with it all, they will be safe but I don't think is a realistic option anymore.

You hear this kind of nonsense all the time: "the Government has to protect us!", as if WE've no responsability at all, just kids being looked after by loving parents. What a crock of shit!

I also feel career politics has a lot to answer for. The MPs that don't rely on their seat for their daily grub tend to be the most independent and critical ones. The frontbenchers? They're like these nodding puppets. Bizarrely, I find the women in the cabinet to be the worst offenders...